And another key question. What will Western governments actually do? What if the war gets really bad? Does the West actually have the balls to put real, biting sanctions on the regime? And will this crash the economy?
> Does anyone have any projections for how this war will go? Is the Ukrainian military powerful?
There are many projections, though wars are notoriously hard to predict.
Ukraine has a military, but Russia is extremely powerful and has one of the largest militaries in the world. Source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/military-... Russia has tons of equipment & everything else it needs to overwhelm Ukraine.
Geography is a key issue in wars, and Ukraine's geography is awful for Ukraine in a Russia/Ukraine conflict. Again, here's my understanding. Ukraine is just a flat plain on the path from Russia, so geography provides relatively little protection to Ukraine. The Dnieper River (which runs basically North/South in the middle of Ukraine) does provide some geographic protection, but by that point Ukraine has lost a huge amount of its territory. Kyiv (the capital of Ukraine) is on the Dnieper river, but it's way to the north near Belarus, and thus Kyiv is relatively easy for Russia to reach via Belarus. The Carpathian mountains in the west and the Crimean mountains in the south make it harder for other countries to help Ukraine. The eastern part of Ukraine has a lot more Russians than the western part, so the eastern parts will be easier for Russia to hold since they'll get more help from the population.
One discussion of a plausible outcome is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9c_HhpvBpg
(Binkov uses a sock puppet to lighten an otherwise somber subject.)
> Will this turn into a guerilla war, or will it go the way of total war? Or will it result in total capitulation?
Russia can take whatever it wants from Ukraine, at least initially. Russia's military is just too powerful, and there aren't any serious geographic barriers to prevent Russia from taking whatever it wants in the short term if Russia really wants to do so.
Whether or not it'll become a guerilla war is up to the Ukrainians. However, if the Ukrainians are willing to make it a guerilla war, and that seems likely at least on the western side, they can make Ukraine very hard to hold (at a horrific cost in Ukrainian lives). In the long run, if the Ukrainians are willing to seriously apply guerilla warfare, I think there's a good chance they'll make at least the western side too painful to hold if Russia goes that far.
I would not be surprised if Russia only took part of Ukraine, e.g., the easternmost parts of Ukraine, perhaps up to the Dnieper River, and perhaps also take Kyev. Russia gets lots more land, and it creates fear (which they may interpret as respect) in everyone around them.
> And another key question. What will Western governments actually do? What if the war gets really bad? Does the West actually have the balls to put real, biting sanctions on the regime? And will this crash the economy?
Western governments have already sent in a lot of military gear to help Ukraine. Western governments won't put troops in. They aren't obligated to do so (Ukraine is not a member of NATO), and the geography of Ukraine would make it hard to do anyway. Western governments have made that quite clear.
They'll put in sanctions. They will probably hurt Russia significantly. I think for Putin this is more about honor, and thus any sanctions will probably not be enough by themselves to force Russia out.
One huge problem is that the EU absolutely needs oil. Solar & wind get press, but they aren't enough today (or for years to come). The EU can't heat their homes or move their people without oil. Russia has oil.
Russia is more likely to grab eastern parts or the eastern side of Ukraine (east of the Dnieper). Russia could take the whole country, but is unlikely to keep it permanently due to guerilla resistance, so it either won't try or it will eventually give up western Ukraine. Sanctions by themselves won't be enough, but sanctions + guerilla warfare would plausibly recover at least the western side of Ukraine.
I do think that there will be serious negative consequences long-term for Russia, beyond sanction-related ones. It suddenly gives a powerful reason for other countries to join NATO (such as Finland and Sweden and a rump of Ukraine) and for them all to increase their military spending. It also gives them a very good reason to not trust Russia in the future.
This is a sad time.
Sanctions will have no effect on Russia. Think about it - what physical items does Russia need to obtain that it cannot produce itself or obtain from China.
What physical items does the West need from Russia - gas and oil because the 'net zero' belief in the West has stymied their ability to obtain energy domestically.
If you don't pay the gas bill then you get your gas cut off. If the EU stops transacting with Russia, then it can't pay its gas bill either. And the result will be the same.
The belief in the power of money in the West will be its downfall. Putin doesn't need the West's money. He has as many roubles as he wishes to deploy and the ability to impose whatever level of tax in roubles is required to ensure people sell their labour and output to him within Russia.
War is funded by manpower, energy resources and industrial production, not by US dollars.
- Russia will want to make this war as short as possible. They have their objectives (occupy Donezk and Luhansk + some more, destroy the offensive power of the Ukranian army and destroy the infrastructure needed for reinforcements ) and then declare the thing a success.
- The US wants it to go on as long as possible, so they will indirectly intervene by financing and supporting any insurgents.
Not selling somebody your tomatoes primarily affects your tomato growers who will go bust, not those buying the tomatoes - particularly if they have plenty of tomatoes internally, can easily produce them or can get them from those lovely tomato growers in China in return for oil and gas.
There's rather too much faith in the power of the mighty US dollar. Quite a few people are going to find out the hard way that electronic impulses on a computer don't mean as much in reality as gas and oil supplies.
Economy is important because it’s felt by ordinary people. In Moscow there were already pretty big protests. I think Putin made a mistake, he could just install fake democratic government and retire in peace.
I don't expect them to occupy the rest of Ukraine. They will probably settle for destroying large parts of the Ukrainian military.
Unfortunately this is what happens when countries are pressured to de-nuclearize, promises of Western protection and then fall to bullies.
Say Ukraine has ~100.000 trained~ soldiers, 10.000s with experience, and ~100.000 further conscripts, and more veterans/civilians.
It would need to end when russian military has enough presence in cities to make resistance meaningless. In order for russians to move by land into the cities, their tanks and road transports would (at the very least) need to survive handheld anti-tank missiles, of which Ukraine holds thousands, maybe 10s of thousands? Probably, weapons and ammunition will not run out for Ukraine as long as they are willing to put up resistance.
The losses for russia before this might amount to 10.000s?
At some point, losses will force a change of russian leadership, or willingness to fight among Ukrainians runs out.
It's like washing your hands in the face of an airborne virus.
I'd be very surprised if this extends too far past separatists territories.
Russia's ability seize it's desired positions is significantly greater if Ukraine has no functioning airforce or military infrastructure.
While this _does_ make it easier for Russia to invade the rest of Ukraine (again, because of a lack of military infrastructure) I still think it is a stretch that they will go for a full-country occupation.
While this is not exactly a parallel, think back to Operation Desert Storm. The US-supported coalition had no intent of occupying Iraq, but it's push into Kuwait was made _significantly_ easier after they completely annihilated a significant portion of Iraq's military structure (inside and outside of Kuwait).
If Putin pushes further then we'll know he's gone completely mad.
AIUI, Ukraine cannot join NATO at the moment; it doesn't control its own borders (Crimea, Donbas).
If Russia annexes Donbas, then they're back to the previous problem: NATO on the border. Note that Russia has not annexed the part of Georgia they invaded; it is now supposedly an independent republic. My guess is that they would settle for independent republics in Donetsk and Luhansk. They don't want Global Nuclear War any more than we do. It's a shame Ukraine didn't agree to give them autonomy earlier; now it looks like Russia is determined to destroy the Ukrainian military infrastructure, and autonomy isn't any longer up for discussion.
Russia is certainly much more powerful militarily in pretty much every respect: it has significantly more manpower, more and better equipment, and economics to supply it logistically. I don't think there's any chance for Ukraine to win on its own.
That said, Ukraine isn't Syria. It has an air force, and, perhaps more importantly, capable anti-air. It has fairly modern tanks, attack helicopters, and cruise missiles. Russia will certainly take considerable losses taking over.
The other aspect is motivation. On the Russian side, there are certainly people whose dream is coming true right now, but most soldiers - especially not conscripts! - are not really willing to take a bullet in the process of "de-Nazifying Ukraine". I don't expect any massive anti-war resistance, but they won't fight to the end.
On the Ukrainian side, there is a mixed bag. On one hand, most of them - even those whose native language is Russian, who might self-identify as ethnically Russian, and who might even support greater regional and language autonomy etc - don't really want Russia to violently take over. People tend to be motivated to fight desperately regardless of ideology when their cities are burning. But there's also a minority that would really like to repeat what happened back in 2014 in Donetsk and Lugansk (and what was kinda sorta attempted but didn't work out in Kharkov and Odessa), and who genuinely see the Russian forces as liberators. Needless to say, those people will make fine overseers once the fighting is over, and might even help during it.
It depends on what you mean by 'win'. Like, of course there's no chance of Ukraine pushing back into Russia, but it's not impossible they do what Finland did and inflict enough pain that Russia pulls back with small gains at best.
The other thing is that the invasion has already triggered those massive sanctions, and they aren't just going away even if Russia pulls out. If Russia does pull out, it'll have paid that price for no gains. So I think that they will keep pushing even if the military costs are higher than anticipated. Putin especially, since this entire escapade appears to be his pet project - the elites who are hit by the sanctions would have a great excuse to remove him.
So I do think that it will be occupation and guerrilla warfare for a while.
It's all there in Keynes' how to pay for the way - except Putin isn't running a liberal democracy that may object to high taxes.
The war was over before it began. The Ukrainian government telling people to take up arms is completely suicidal. War in the 21st century begins and ends with air superiority. Nothing else matters at all. Once air superiority is established, the war is over. And Russia is flying with absolute impunity over all of Ukraine now. The smartest decision is total capitulation at this point. Because Putin will stop at nothing and will not respect any form of ROE. The alternative is Kyiv being reduced to rubble and tens of thousands dead.
If this were Bosnia or Libya, we would. But the reality is that we are now playing chicken with a lunatic that has his finger on the worlds largest arsenal of nuclear ICBMs.
Not enough to deny the airspace. And they are useless against high altitude bombers/attackers. But the real threat is not so much getting bombed from the air, but the fact the Russia will be able to move and deploy their artillery/MLRS completely at will due to air superiority. No doubt we will see cities flattened if prolonged urban fighting drags out.
> What will Western governments actually do?
Nothing really.
> Does the West actually have the balls to put real, biting sanctions on the regime?
No. Boris Johnson in the UK is already being insulted for his nothing sanctions. I highly doubt the West will go after the assets of Putin and the rest of his oligarchs.
> And will this crash the economy?
Possibly?
The US did sanction Russia, but is actually more of a sanction against Germany. China might even like an invasion for different reasons, although they probably will call them out on it officially.
You are probably correct that western countries won't do much.
But given that it did happen, I don't think the Russians will back down now. My guess is that they'll occupy Luhansk and Donetsk with minimal losses while severely reducing the Ukraine's ability to do anything about that. Judging from the events last night, the Ukranian air defenses were basically not very effective and they likely suffered a lot of damage to what little offensive capability they might have had.
The question is what the end game is. It's important to consider all the other countries that border Russia. Georgia for example. Or Belarus, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. All former Soviet territory with pro-Russian regimes and some domestic anti Russian sentiments. I'd say that this is a not so subtle hint to those countries to fall in line and do as their told. It would be a mistake to assume that this is just about the Ukraine.
As for the West's response; I think we're seeing it and it seems Putin is neither impressed nor surprised by it so far. I don't think there's much else the West can or will do. I think when the dust settles, the EU will end up re-establishing some level of trade with Russia eventually but the relation will be an uncomfortable one for some time to come. But the gas will keep on flowing, for now.
I do think that proposals for e.g. new natural gas power plants are effectively shelved as of now in the EU. Given what just happened, increasing the EUs dependence on Russia for gas even more than it already is seems not advisable. Once that realization sinks in, I think Russian gas imports will start decreasing pretty rapidly over the next decade as countries move ahead with plans to basically stop burning gas on a much more accelerated timeline than what countries were talking about at COP26 just a few months ago.
Economically, we were overdue for a stock market correction and I think we're in the middle of one now; at least judging from my investment portfolio this morning which is looking like most of last years gains have been wiped out as of this morning. A lot of people are going to have a rough year economically. Especially in Russia.
Putin needs just enough territory so that the NATO can't get too much near Russian and a pillow territory to handle future conflicts without touching Russian territory
The US also has plenty of volunteer militias, yet I doubt that could be seen as an indicator for Americans unwillingness to fight for their country.
I'll concede to your comparison to a US militia when some state like Florida leaves the union and the US has to arm some QAnon loons to take it back.
[0] https://de.rt.com/europa/132333-putin-verkundet-militarische...
He also said he'd "show Ukraine real decommunization" the day before. Not sure if that was propaganda or a threat…